FLDS aren't welfare cheats after all.

[Wingnut]

Originally Posted by Fiannan

Which is as legal as BYU students living in married housing getting WICK assistance for families.

Women, Infants, Children, Kangaroos?

[MarginOfError]

[quote=MarginOfError;311702]

Originally Posted by KristofferUmfrey

75 a month and 209 over a year-long period for Food Stamps. Do you realize how many folks live in CC? Do your think any of the regular folks or the Centennial Park folks might be part of the statistics also?[\QUOTE]

Okay, let's put those two together. 75 cases a month in Hildale at an average cost of $829, when the average food stamp cost in Washington County is $250. The average cost in Hildale costs over $500 more than the average case in Washington County. Why is it so much more expensive...because the household size is so much bigger.

And yes, I do comprehend the idea that not every case is a polygamist family. I have a pretty good feel for how statistics work. I would caution you not to try and outflank me with statistics.



ha ha...holy state of Utah...that's funny.

Let me state this again, in case you're not catching on to what I'm saying. I have nothing against these people applying for welfare. I'm not about to let families starve. But to say that there is no wrong-doing on their part is simply false. Either they are living polygamous marriages--which is illegal--or they are encouraging men to have multiple families out of wedlock--which our society at large consider immoral (not to mention the LDS Church). No, they aren't committing welfare fraud...that doesn't automatically mean they're making wise decisions.

[quote=KristofferUmfrey;311745]

Originally Posted by MarginOfError

Modern American society considers it immoral. Yeah, modern American society is a great yardstick for measuring morality.

(I'll refrain from comment about the LDS church considering it immoral.)

That's exactly the point--even in a society as backwards as ours (where hardly anything is considered to be immoral), men having multiple families out of wedlock is an immoral decision. How heinous does it have to be for our society to still consider it immoral?

I'm surprised to see you contest the immorality of men having multiple families out of wedlock. Unless of course you're not reading the post and assigning the statement of immorality to polygamy. If this is the case, I encourage you to carefully read again what I wrote about polygamy. You might notice that I called it illegal.

Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you.

[Fiannan]

I think the best way to illustrate the "immorality" of polygamy is to use the example of male circumcism.

It was commanded of God to circumcise male children and was still promoted even in the days after the death and resurrection of Jesus. Yet eventually it lost popularity as a mandate.

Now there are religions that still mandate male circumcism -- Judaism and Islam come to mind. There are some who would make this practice illegal and they often say it is a form of child abuse -- and of course child abuse is considered immoral. So are those who slice off the foreskin of their male infants immoral? Those who would make it illegal could say it is but they would then have to say that the God of the Old Testament was promoting immorality.

Now even though it is not a requirement for LDS parents to circumcise their boys I think it would be very strange for an LDS person to promote the idea that it's immoral and should be an illegal form of child abuse because to do so, and to say that parents who do this are child abusers, would be to admit that the foundation of their religion has holes in it. In the same sense so it is to attack polygamy or polygamists. Polygamy can be seen as something that is suspended in our beliefs but then again who are we to judge those who are Mormon who broke away due to their sincere belief that God intended for polygamy to remain? Then again there is the "It's illegal" arguement but that is just a cop out -- it was illegal in Joseph Smith's day too and the Church practiced it. Also, in many countries polygamy is legal so to say that it is immoral based on the law of the USA is to say immorality depends on one's geographical position on the globe.

[MarginOfError]

Originally Posted by Fiannan

I think the best way to illustrate the "immorality" of polygamy is to use the example of male circumcism.

It was commanded of God to circumcise male children and was still promoted even in the days after the death and resurrection of Jesus. Yet eventually it lost popularity as a mandate.

Now there are religions that still mandate male circumcism -- Judaism and Islam come to mind. There are some who would make this practice illegal and they often say it is a form of child abuse -- and of course child abuse is considered immoral. So are those who slice off the foreskin of their male infants immoral? Those who would make it illegal could say it is but they would then have to say that the God of the Old Testament was promoting immorality.

Now even though it is not a requirement for LDS parents to circumcise their boys I think it would be very strange for an LDS person to promote the idea that it's immoral and should be an illegal form of child abuse because to do so, and to say that parents who do this are child abusers, would be to admit that the foundation of their religion has holes in it. In the same sense so it is to attack polygamy or polygamists. Polygamy can be seen as something that is suspended in our beliefs but then again who are we to judge those who are Mormon who broke away due to their sincere belief that God intended for polygamy to remain? Then again there is the "It's illegal" arguement but that is just a cop out -- it was illegal in Joseph Smith's day too and the Church practiced it. Also, in many countries polygamy is legal so to say that it is immoral based on the law of the USA is to say immorality depends on one's geographical position on the globe.

Official Declaration 1

Show me where the Lord has commanded that the practice of circumcision should be ended and your argument becomes valid. Furthermore, I very rarely hear complaints against circumcision of males, especially from people that have any education about it. The much larger uproar is over circumcision of females.

Lastly, I'm curious how you know that polygamy will in fact be reinstated. I'm pretty sure the Lord reserves the right to make those decisions and, to date, I know of no resources to indicate that it will certainly be reinstated. Perhaps it would be best to keep an open mind.

[MorningStar]

I don't deny that FLDS need welfare, but that they have created their circumstances as they break the laws of the land and God's laws.

The 12th Article of Faith Says

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

President Hinckley said any members that practiced polygamy would be excommunicated for doing so. So Fiannan, your claim that these polygamists are keeping a commandment is nonsense and the fact that they are bringing lots of spirits into the world isn't anymore valiant than people who have many children while shacking up. God doesn't command people to commit adultery. A prophet said that the practice of polygamy was to end. The apostate groups who chose to stray from the church over this revelation shouldn't be praised for it. There was a season for polygamy and that season is over.

[SisterofJared]

The fact is, food stamp requirements do not require that all the household be husband/wife/children. A niece can live with you and you get food stamps for them. A group of unrelated people can live together and get food stamps. It's based on the number of people and the income, not relationship. So it's obviously not fraud for a man to get food stamps for his 3 wives and 12 kids.

As for it being immoral.... I'm sorry, it's no more immoral for the polygamist to get those benefits than the man with one wife and three kids. The program is an immoral program. It is socialist and is against the free agency God gave us.

I also feel empathy towards a people that are just living as they believe God commanded them to live. Yes, a modern day prophet has revealed that we are to no longer practice polygamy. However, most of the world, including FLDS, do not recognize him as a prophet of God. I think it is unconscionable to expect any person or group to violate the rules that they believe are from God. And yes, the article of faith says We believe in honoring the law of the land. But another article of Faith also states, "We claim the priviledge of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same priviledge; Let them worship who, where, or what they may."

It's time we stop prosecuting and persecuting polygamists. The fact that polygamy is even illegal is because of an interventist government policy to butt into citizens lives and regulate their business. When Joseph Smith revealed polygamy, it was not illegal. It became illegal after the fact as people were outraged at this unconventional practice. Because the people of that time, and hence the government, could not MYOB, dedicated fathers who only sought to follow a commandment from their God, were thrown in jail, and many had to flee the country. It was wrong for the government to interfere then, and it is wrong for them to interfere today.

That being so, the idea that polygamists have less right to government resources is bunk. No one should be able to redistribute wealth, not the guy with one wife and one children or the polygamist. But only for the reasons that the welfare state is immoral and anti-freedom and a pawn of satan.

Sister of Jared

[KristofferUmfrey]

Originally Posted by SisterofJared

The fact is, food stamp requirements do not require that all the household be husband/wife/children. A niece can live with you and you get food stamps for them. A group of unrelated people can live together and get food stamps. It's based on the number of people and the income, not relationship. So it's obviously not fraud for a man to get food stamps for his 3 wives and 12 kids.

As for it being immoral.... I'm sorry, it's no more immoral for the polygamist to get those benefits than the man with one wife and three kids. The program is an immoral program. It is socialist and is against the free agency God gave us.

I also feel empathy towards a people that are just living as they believe God commanded them to live. Yes, a modern day prophet has revealed that we are to no longer practice polygamy. However, most of the world, including FLDS, do not recognize him as a prophet of God. I think it is unconscionable to expect any person or group to violate the rules that they believe are from God. And yes, the article of faith says We believe in honoring the law of the land. But another article of Faith also states, "We claim the priviledge of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same priviledge; Let them worship who, where, or what they may."

It's time we stop prosecuting and persecuting polygamists. The fact that polygamy is even illegal is because of an interventist government policy to butt into citizens lives and regulate their business. When Joseph Smith revealed polygamy, it was not illegal. It became illegal after the fact as people were outraged at this unconventional practice. Because the people of that time, and hence the government, could not MYOB, dedicated fathers who only sought to follow a commandment from their God, were thrown in jail, and many had to flee the country. It was wrong for the government to interfere then, and it is wrong for them to interfere today.

That being so, the idea that polygamists have less right to government resources is bunk. No one should be able to redistribute wealth, not the guy with one wife and one children or the polygamist. But only for the reasons that the welfare state is immoral and anti-freedom and a pawn of satan.

Sister of Jared

Thank you for that post. It is good to see members of the LDS church who have thought this through and see it for what it is.
One of the saddest and most disappointing things this last year for me has been the reaction of many members of the LDS church to this debacle down in Texas and the response of the LDS church itself, sending out Quentin Cook to beg the media to make a distinction and make sure everyone knew they weren't part of the LDS church. Never once did the church express concern for the FLDS families or the children torn from their parents. They didn't have to condone plural marriage but some sympathy at least for the children would have been nice. But instead they were most worried about the image of the church and how the situation would affect that image.
This year was the first time I was ever angry at the LDS church. I may have left and don't agree with it's teachings but I was never angry at it until this year.

[SisterofJared]

That mess in Texas left me outraged. Totally insanity. Can you imagine how we would have felt if the government came in and started snatching kids just because they live in LDS homes? Government tyranny, utterly disregarding the welfare of the children and hiding behind a wall of pretense.

They should have thrown the people responsible in jail! Then out of office and into an unemployment line.

Sister of Jared

[Fiannan]

I don't deny that FLDS need welfare, but that they have created their circumstances as they break the laws of the land and God's laws.

The 12th Article of Faith Says

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

Yet when you go to the Utah state capitol you will see a statue to a man who knew the law quite well and yet interpreted the law itself as being immoral and chose to not follow it -- and urged members not to follow it in regards to polygamy (that of course was Brigham Young).

President Hinckley said any members that practiced polygamy would be excommunicated for doing so. So Fiannan, your claim that these polygamists are keeping a commandment is nonsense and the fact that they are bringing lots of spirits into the world isn't anymore valiant than people who have many children while shacking up. God doesn't command people to commit adultery. A prophet said that the practice of polygamy was to end. The apostate groups who chose to stray from the church over this revelation shouldn't be praised for it. There was a season for polygamy and that season is over.

The pope has also said that...oh wait, LDS people do not recognize the authority of the pope...so I suppose that we can't bring any statements he makes up as anything but good advice -- or not. That's the way that people in polygamist groups for the most part view what they call the "Salt Lake church". So if we say that they are breaking a commandment of God, and that they are merely committing adultery, then we are using the same play book as the people who attacked the LDS Church back in the 1800s (and perhaps those in the LDS Church who actively persecute these people will have to answer for this inconsistency with history as well as the Article of Faith that says we believe in allowing people to live their religion as they please when judgement day comes).

[pam]

Yet when you go to the Utah state capitol you will see a statue to a man who knew the law quite well and yet interpreted the law itself as being immoral and chose to not follow it -- and urged members not to follow it in regards to polygamy (that of course was Brigham Young).

I'm a little confused or a lot dense. You make it sound as if Brigham Young was extremely defiant and chose to break laws. When did the law go into effect?

As far as I remember the manifesto took place in 1890 which would have been after the death of Brigham Young.



From lds.org

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. At certain times and for His specific purposes, God, through His prophets, has directed the practice of plural marriage (sometimes called polygamy), which means one man having more than one living wife at the same time. In obedience to direction from God, Latter-day Saints followed this practice for about 50 years during the 1800s but officially ceased the practice of such marriages after the Manifesto was issued by President Woodruff in 1890. Since that time, plural marriage has not been approved by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and any member adopting this practice is subject to losing his or her membership in the Church.